{"title":"Correction to “Capturing Real-World Rare Disease Patient Journeys: Are Current Methodologies Sufficient for Informed Healthcare Decisions?”","authors":"","doi":"10.1111/jep.70072","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>K. A. Cribbs, L. T. A. Blackmore, A. R. Banks, D. S. Kim, B. J. Lahue, “Capturing Real-World Rare Disease Patient Journeys: Are Current Methodologies Sufficient for Informed Healthcare Decisions?,” <i>Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice</i> 31, no. 1 (2025): e70010, doi:10.1111/jep.70010.</p><p>In the Abstract, under <b>Results</b>, the following result was incorrect, “…<i>and <b>cross-sectional (26%)</b> designs…”</i> (<i>n</i> = 26, or 84%, of studies were cross-sectional, not 26%). This should have read, “<i>and <b>cross-sectional (84%)</b> designs….”</i></p><p>In Figure 5, the word ‘perceived’ in “Self-Perceived Health Status” is spelled incorrectly. This should have read, “Self-Perceived Health Status.” A corrected version of this figure is on the following page.</p><p>We apologize for these errors.</p>","PeriodicalId":15997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","volume":"31 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jep.70072","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jep.70072","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
K. A. Cribbs, L. T. A. Blackmore, A. R. Banks, D. S. Kim, B. J. Lahue, “Capturing Real-World Rare Disease Patient Journeys: Are Current Methodologies Sufficient for Informed Healthcare Decisions?,” Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 31, no. 1 (2025): e70010, doi:10.1111/jep.70010.
In the Abstract, under Results, the following result was incorrect, “…and cross-sectional (26%) designs…” (n = 26, or 84%, of studies were cross-sectional, not 26%). This should have read, “and cross-sectional (84%) designs….”
In Figure 5, the word ‘perceived’ in “Self-Perceived Health Status” is spelled incorrectly. This should have read, “Self-Perceived Health Status.” A corrected version of this figure is on the following page.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice aims to promote the evaluation and development of clinical practice across medicine, nursing and the allied health professions. All aspects of health services research and public health policy analysis and debate are of interest to the Journal whether studied from a population-based or individual patient-centred perspective. Of particular interest to the Journal are submissions on all aspects of clinical effectiveness and efficiency including evidence-based medicine, clinical practice guidelines, clinical decision making, clinical services organisation, implementation and delivery, health economic evaluation, health process and outcome measurement and new or improved methods (conceptual and statistical) for systematic inquiry into clinical practice. Papers may take a classical quantitative or qualitative approach to investigation (or may utilise both techniques) or may take the form of learned essays, structured/systematic reviews and critiques.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
